00'GT vs. 01'Camaro SS - Page 4

06-19-2001, 01:23 PM

I'm gonna miss this

------------------
'90 LX 5.0; 12K original miles (no sh*&); 3.55 gears; pulleys;Edelbrock Performer Heads; BBK shorties; MSD 6AL box w/ blaster 2 coil; Motorsport E303 cam; Pro-M 75mm MAF; BBK 70mm TB; Eibach spring kit; Southside welded subs; K&N cone filter charger; Hurst shifter; fiberglass turbo hood; A/C-less; rear seat-less; cat-less; 2 chamber Flos; Corbeau racing seats (fronts);
30# injectors; JMS Chip; 190 lb fp; TFS track heat Intake (12.299 @ 113)

Unit 5302 · 06-19-2001, 06:13 PM

I honestly don't think a CRX Si will pull 125. The car I raced certainly wouldn't.

If the stock Si is accurate at 125mph, then yeah, you should have 130. The whole question is, is the 125 accurate.

Above the comment on the C4 doing 170 was made. The C4 was rated at anywhere between 300-330hp. The 94 LT-1 Vette was rated in Motor Trend as a 170mph top end car. The C5's have been tested for top end. They hit the wall at 172. The C5 is way slippery when compared to the C4, and it's got way more hp than that LT-1 Vette. We're talking 50hp there. That equates to 2mph? Something isn't adding up there. Since the C5 has been road tested for top end, and it is done at 172, there is no way I can believe the C4 could do 170. What does that mean to me? Chevy lied about the top speed rating.

Maybe the Si has a much better Cd than my Escort did, but they aren't too far off in hp. The scort was good for what it was, and yeah, it was a POS in quality dispite being a Japanese (Mazda) car.

Unit 5302 · 06-19-2001, 06:17 PM

That being said, I think you at least had something to base your claims on.

Sorry if I'm harsh, damn, I must be in a bad mood or something.

KillaZ350 · 06-19-2001, 07:27 PM

hehe, gotta luuuuuv those LS1s!!!! im not trying to start anything and i really like stangs, i almost bought one... But im surprised you did 'that' good against him....

To improve your upper rpms would be a pita, and i doubt you would be able to keep your new car warrenty with a cam/head swap.... Sooooo, how about some N20 for a little extra boost for 3rdgear!?!?

If you ever have to take it to the dealer it would be easy to unhookt he system like it was never ever their, and the only cars youll ever need the bottle on the street 90% of the time for are LS1s anyway...

------------------
Arctic White 1998 Camaro Z28
See my Can of Whoop Azz here
Flowmaster 3in American Thunder Catback - MTI Air Lid/K&N filter,!MAF, FRA

Dark_5.0 · 06-20-2001, 12:11 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Unit 5302:
That being said, I think you at least had something to base your claims on.

Sorry if I'm harsh, damn, I must be in a bad mood or something.

If you didnt have someone to argue with what fun would that be

1BAD89 · 06-20-2001, 11:29 PM

Let's say a 94 all stock is rated at 300hp, the new LS1 vettes are rated at 345hp that is 45hp more not 50hp. You fail your math class Unit? =P Plus the vettes were underated from the factory anyway I think. I've been at the dyno on numerous cars LT1's , LT4's. The LT4's I have seen dynoed almost 330hp all stock, 328rwhp to be exact. And the LT1's were around 275-290hp. Also the new vettes LS1 not LS6(Z06) are rated at 173mph not 172mph. =P http://www.netvettes.com/1992.html http://www.netvettes.com/1997.html

I have plenty more places that tell the facts. Also I have seen a video that my buddy brought back from the salt flats that showed a 92 vette wth only a k and n going 171mph. So hmmmmmm......nothing like the cold hard facts huh? I would love to argue with you over vettes, I have been reearching them for a while now. But I suppose we could argue and argue all we wanted but your mind is probaly not going to change on the subject, unless you see viual proof as I did. I'm the same way.

[This message has been edited by 1BAD89 (edited 06-21-2001).]

1BAD89 · 06-20-2001, 11:41 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by 1BAD89:
Let's say a 94 all stock is rated at 300hp, the new LS1 vettes are rated at 345hp that is 45hp more not 50hp. You fail your math class Unit? =P Plus the vettes were underated from the factory anyway I think. I've been at the dyno on numerous cars LT1's , LT4's. The LT4's I have seen dynoed almost 330hp all stock, 328rwhp to be exact. And the LT1's were around 275-290hp. Also the new vettes LS1 not LS6(Z06) are rated at 173mph not 172mph. =P http://www.netvettes.com/1992.html http://www.netvettes.com/1997.html

I have plenty more places that tell the facts. Also I have seen a video that my buddy brought back from the salt flats that showed a 92 vette wth only a k and n going 171mph. So hmmmmmm......nothing like the cold hard facts huh? I would love to argue with you over vettes, I have been reearching them for a while now. But I suppose we could argue and argue all we wanted but your mind is probaly not going to change on the subject, unless you see visual proof as I did. I'm the same way.

[This message has been edited by 1BAD89 (edited 06-21-2001).]

Unit 5302 · 06-20-2001, 11:47 PM

So you're saying the LS-1 is rated correctly? Okay.

Anyway, god forbid I should round 45 to 50. Regardless of that, the new Vette has a .29 Cd, I don't recall what the C-4 is. I believe one of the issues of M/T I have top ended some cars in a test. Viper, Vette, Ferrari, whatever. I'm going off memory, but the Vette peaked at 172mph.

If you look up at my post, it says the C-4 is rated at 170mph, I just don't think I'll get there. There is a typo also, the ZR-1 is rated at 178, not 170. The Grand Sport, which makes 330hp with it's LT4 motor is rated at 165mph.

I've done research on Vette's too. My research shows at least 2x as many Vette's on the side of the road with the hood up as Mustangs, LOL! That dispite the fact there are a ton more Stang's on the road.

06-21-2001, 01:50 AM

This is funny, i got my '85 prelude (first car) up to 120 on a flat straightaway, but it took awhile, i've also gotten a '91 4 banger mustang up to 115 a friend in a maxima pacing me. this doesn't settle anything, but it took forever in both cars.

------------------
'84 Mustang 5.0 LX
My car

1BAD89 · 06-21-2001, 04:28 PM

I have never in my whole life seen a vette on the side of the road, ever. Zr1 385-405hp depending on year. I never said anything about a ZR1.

[This message has been edited by 1BAD89 (edited 06-21-2001).]

1BAD89 · 06-21-2001, 09:13 PM

More proof... a 94 stock LT1
http://images.cardomain.com/installs...917_7_full.jpg

Unit 5302 · 06-22-2001, 12:30 AM

No, I commented on the ZR-1, not you.

From my understanding, again, radar isn't perfectly accurate above 100mph. I never delved deep into that subject to find out why. Just something I was informed a while ago.

I've seen 2 Vette's and 0 stangs on the side of the road in the last week.

Usually, if I'm driving a lot, I'll see a couple/three Vette's broken down a month. Usually with the hood up and some guy crawling around trying hopelessly to look underneath.

1BAD89 · 06-22-2001, 02:22 PM

Well around here I have never seen one on the side of the road, my stang has been on the side of the road before though. =P I would imagine all cars have there problems though including corvettes.

06-22-2001, 05:10 PM

1bad89, now I'm completely convinced....that 167mph radar reading proves it! (but how do I know that wasn't your Civic)

j/k Civic's I WILL argue against.....Vettes I will not.

------------------
'90 LX 5.0; 12K original miles (no sh*&); 3.55 gears; pulleys;Edelbrock Performer Heads; BBK shorties; MSD 6AL box w/ blaster 2 coil; Motorsport E303 cam; Pro-M 75mm MAF; BBK 70mm TB; Eibach spring kit; Southside welded subs; K&N cone filter charger; Hurst shifter; fiberglass turbo hood; A/C-less; rear seat-less; cat-less; 2 chamber Flos; Corbeau racing seats (fronts);
30# injectors; JMS Chip; 190 lb fp; TFS track heat Intake (12.299 @ 113)

blue00gt · 06-22-2001, 07:03 PM

I think this trend of speedos reading high from the factory is a plot by the automakers to make your warranty run out faster.
By the way, I think I got up to 3 mph walking to the bathroom just now. Challenge my claim if you must.

1BAD89 · 06-23-2001, 04:15 AM

When I walk to my room I usuallu pace mysef at about 3.89997 mph. So I guess I would win if we were racing huh? =P

90dpscoupe · 06-25-2001, 02:09 AM

I have seen a vette broke down on i35, about a 91-95 but oh well my car broke down before too, it was when my fuel pump decided to go, at least it wasnt on the highway.

stng87 · 06-28-2001, 03:06 AM

This is what I think. The honda was being pushed by a fox mustang. That explains the 130 mph. Sorry I just cant argue with UNIT. He knows his shitt.

------------------
1987 black with t-tops. Cobra intake, 1.7 cobra crane rollers, gt40p's, bbk shorties, off road h-pipe, adj. FPR, Tremec t-5z, 65mm TB, 4.10's, adj cable, 155lph fuel pump, Ram clutch kit,
275-60-15 BFG TA's on Welds, Hurts shifter,Former AOD Semper Fi

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
95 GT & 00GT Didnt have a chance!	SprchrgdPony	Stang Stories	1	03-17-2002 11:28 PM
k & n air charger question on stock 00gt	Crazy Horse GT	Modular Madness	2	03-01-2002 10:05 PM
New best in my 00GT.......	lethrneck32	Modular Madness	1	02-02-2002 11:31 PM
Took my chances against a 00'GT	Smokedawg	Stang Stories	15	08-07-2001 01:15 AM
My buddy ran a 13.66 stock '00GT	Try Me	Stang Stories	28	05-03-2001 09:35 AM

06-19-2001, 01:23 PM	#61
bada$$lx Guest Posts: n/a	I'm gonna miss this ------------------ '90 LX 5.0; 12K original miles (no sh*&); 3.55 gears; pulleys;Edelbrock Performer Heads; BBK shorties; MSD 6AL box w/ blaster 2 coil; Motorsport E303 cam; Pro-M 75mm MAF; BBK 70mm TB; Eibach spring kit; Southside welded subs; K&N cone filter charger; Hurst shifter; fiberglass turbo hood; A/C-less; rear seat-less; cat-less; 2 chamber Flos; Corbeau racing seats (fronts); 30# injectors; JMS Chip; 190 lb fp; TFS track heat Intake (12.299 @ 113)

06-19-2001, 06:13 PM	#62
Unit 5302 Registered Member Join Date: May 1999 Posts: 5,246	I honestly don't think a CRX Si will pull 125. The car I raced certainly wouldn't. If the stock Si is accurate at 125mph, then yeah, you should have 130. The whole question is, is the 125 accurate. Above the comment on the C4 doing 170 was made. The C4 was rated at anywhere between 300-330hp. The 94 LT-1 Vette was rated in Motor Trend as a 170mph top end car. The C5's have been tested for top end. They hit the wall at 172. The C5 is way slippery when compared to the C4, and it's got way more hp than that LT-1 Vette. We're talking 50hp there. That equates to 2mph? Something isn't adding up there. Since the C5 has been road tested for top end, and it is done at 172, there is no way I can believe the C4 could do 170. What does that mean to me? Chevy lied about the top speed rating. Maybe the Si has a much better Cd than my Escort did, but they aren't too far off in hp. The scort was good for what it was, and yeah, it was a POS in quality dispite being a Japanese (Mazda) car.

06-19-2001, 06:17 PM	#63
Unit 5302 Registered Member Join Date: May 1999 Posts: 5,246	That being said, I think you at least had something to base your claims on. Sorry if I'm harsh, damn, I must be in a bad mood or something.

06-19-2001, 07:27 PM	#64
KillaZ350 Registered Member Join Date: Mar 2000 Location: Columbia, South Carolina Posts: 214	hehe, gotta luuuuuv those LS1s!!!! im not trying to start anything and i really like stangs, i almost bought one... But im surprised you did 'that' good against him.... To improve your upper rpms would be a pita, and i doubt you would be able to keep your new car warrenty with a cam/head swap.... Sooooo, how about some N20 for a little extra boost for 3rdgear!?!? If you ever have to take it to the dealer it would be easy to unhookt he system like it was never ever their, and the only cars youll ever need the bottle on the street 90% of the time for are LS1s anyway... ------------------ Arctic White 1998 Camaro Z28 See my Can of Whoop Azz here Flowmaster 3in American Thunder Catback - MTI Air Lid/K&N filter,!MAF, FRA

06-20-2001, 11:29 PM	#66
1BAD89 Tubbed and Juiced Join Date: Mar 2001 Location: Tulsa, Oklahoma Posts: 1,861	Let's say a 94 all stock is rated at 300hp, the new LS1 vettes are rated at 345hp that is 45hp more not 50hp. You fail your math class Unit? =P Plus the vettes were underated from the factory anyway I think. I've been at the dyno on numerous cars LT1's , LT4's. The LT4's I have seen dynoed almost 330hp all stock, 328rwhp to be exact. And the LT1's were around 275-290hp. Also the new vettes LS1 not LS6(Z06) are rated at 173mph not 172mph. =P http://www.netvettes.com/1992.html http://www.netvettes.com/1997.html I have plenty more places that tell the facts. Also I have seen a video that my buddy brought back from the salt flats that showed a 92 vette wth only a k and n going 171mph. So hmmmmmm......nothing like the cold hard facts huh? I would love to argue with you over vettes, I have been reearching them for a while now. But I suppose we could argue and argue all we wanted but your mind is probaly not going to change on the subject, unless you see viual proof as I did. I'm the same way. [This message has been edited by 1BAD89 (edited 06-21-2001).]

06-20-2001, 11:47 PM	#68
Unit 5302 Registered Member Join Date: May 1999 Posts: 5,246	So you're saying the LS-1 is rated correctly? Okay. Anyway, god forbid I should round 45 to 50. Regardless of that, the new Vette has a .29 Cd, I don't recall what the C-4 is. I believe one of the issues of M/T I have top ended some cars in a test. Viper, Vette, Ferrari, whatever. I'm going off memory, but the Vette peaked at 172mph. If you look up at my post, it says the C-4 is rated at 170mph, I just don't think I'll get there. There is a typo also, the ZR-1 is rated at 178, not 170. The Grand Sport, which makes 330hp with it's LT4 motor is rated at 165mph. I've done research on Vette's too. My research shows at least 2x as many Vette's on the side of the road with the hood up as Mustangs, LOL! That dispite the fact there are a ton more Stang's on the road.

06-21-2001, 01:50 AM	#69
84stangLX Guest Posts: n/a	This is funny, i got my '85 prelude (first car) up to 120 on a flat straightaway, but it took awhile, i've also gotten a '91 4 banger mustang up to 115 a friend in a maxima pacing me. this doesn't settle anything, but it took forever in both cars. ------------------ '84 Mustang 5.0 LX My car

06-21-2001, 04:28 PM	#70
1BAD89 Tubbed and Juiced Join Date: Mar 2001 Location: Tulsa, Oklahoma Posts: 1,861	I have never in my whole life seen a vette on the side of the road, ever. Zr1 385-405hp depending on year. I never said anything about a ZR1. [This message has been edited by 1BAD89 (edited 06-21-2001).]

06-21-2001, 09:13 PM	#71
1BAD89 Tubbed and Juiced Join Date: Mar 2001 Location: Tulsa, Oklahoma Posts: 1,861	More proof... a 94 stock LT1 http://images.cardomain.com/installs...917_7_full.jpg

06-22-2001, 12:30 AM	#72
Unit 5302 Registered Member Join Date: May 1999 Posts: 5,246	No, I commented on the ZR-1, not you. From my understanding, again, radar isn't perfectly accurate above 100mph. I never delved deep into that subject to find out why. Just something I was informed a while ago. I've seen 2 Vette's and 0 stangs on the side of the road in the last week. Usually, if I'm driving a lot, I'll see a couple/three Vette's broken down a month. Usually with the hood up and some guy crawling around trying hopelessly to look underneath.

06-22-2001, 02:22 PM	#73
1BAD89 Tubbed and Juiced Join Date: Mar 2001 Location: Tulsa, Oklahoma Posts: 1,861	Well around here I have never seen one on the side of the road, my stang has been on the side of the road before though. =P I would imagine all cars have there problems though including corvettes.

06-22-2001, 05:10 PM	#74
bada$$lx Guest Posts: n/a	1bad89, now I'm completely convinced....that 167mph radar reading proves it! (but how do I know that wasn't your Civic) j/k Civic's I WILL argue against.....Vettes I will not. ------------------ '90 LX 5.0; 12K original miles (no sh*&); 3.55 gears; pulleys;Edelbrock Performer Heads; BBK shorties; MSD 6AL box w/ blaster 2 coil; Motorsport E303 cam; Pro-M 75mm MAF; BBK 70mm TB; Eibach spring kit; Southside welded subs; K&N cone filter charger; Hurst shifter; fiberglass turbo hood; A/C-less; rear seat-less; cat-less; 2 chamber Flos; Corbeau racing seats (fronts); 30# injectors; JMS Chip; 190 lb fp; TFS track heat Intake (12.299 @ 113)

06-22-2001, 07:03 PM	#75
blue00gt Mustang Addict Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: McKinney, TX Posts: 1,294	I think this trend of speedos reading high from the factory is a plot by the automakers to make your warranty run out faster. By the way, I think I got up to 3 mph walking to the bathroom just now. Challenge my claim if you must.

06-23-2001, 04:15 AM	#76
1BAD89 Tubbed and Juiced Join Date: Mar 2001 Location: Tulsa, Oklahoma Posts: 1,861	When I walk to my room I usuallu pace mysef at about 3.89997 mph. So I guess I would win if we were racing huh? =P

06-25-2001, 02:09 AM	#77
90dpscoupe Registered Member Join Date: Jun 2000 Location: sanantonio, Tx, usa Posts: 1,407	I have seen a vette broke down on i35, about a 91-95 but oh well my car broke down before too, it was when my fuel pump decided to go, at least it wasnt on the highway.

06-28-2001, 03:06 AM	#78
stng87 Registered Member Join Date: Sep 2000 Location: southern california Posts: 329	This is what I think. The honda was being pushed by a fox mustang. That explains the 130 mph. Sorry I just cant argue with UNIT. He knows his shitt. ------------------ 1987 black with t-tops. Cobra intake, 1.7 cobra crane rollers, gt40p's, bbk shorties, off road h-pipe, adj. FPR, Tremec t-5z, 65mm TB, 4.10's, adj cable, 155lph fuel pump, Ram clutch kit, 275-60-15 BFG TA's on Welds, Hurts shifter,Former AOD Semper Fi